6561

At this point do we know what or if there is a best material to use for these on the go drinks? I am guessing it’s not plastic, but is aluminium really better?

6562

At least aluminum will slowly degrade and is an element. Plastic didn’t exist 150 years ago, and the shit is now everywhere and basically will never degrade.

6563

They said something in the article about aluminium having a bigger carbon foot print. I don’t know that I really believe them because it seems focused on turning a finite resources into plastic bottles and not the life of the product which no one wants to recycle anymore. The cans seem like a serviceable product, regardless of what customers want, and of course we can move onto something better if there was better.

6564

I’d be fine with going back to glass personally.

Bonus is they can be used as molotovs for when society collapses.
These silly plastic bottles just melt when you try to use them.

6565

Oh come now, comrade. Plastic does not shatter like glass. If you are using plastic you are inefficient. The collective wants your badge back.

6566

Eh…a plastic bottle will actually break down in about the same amount of time as an aluminum can. Around 400 years for both, i believe.

Also… Plastic is also made of elements. I mean… It’s just a petroleum product.

6567

Once aluminum is created it needs much less energy to be recycled. If it was all recycled it would make a difference.

6568

I’d like to see Coke replace all of their vending machines around the world with Coke stations. Basically, you bring your canister to the Coke tap, and you pay for the number of seconds you use the tap (as you would to pump gas) to fill up your reusable bottle. Optionally, you can purchase a reusable bottle if you forgot to bring yours.

6569

In NYC I would frequent bars that had either:

Growlers. Glass bottles that you would bring in to be refilled.

Pubs that had a mug deal. You buy the mug. They keep them there. When you go in they bring your mug with your beer of choice.

It was fun.

6570

I remember as a kid returning soda bottles for money. We all did it. It was fun. We’d walk out with enough money to buy a pack of baseball cards or two.

6571

Yeah, during the early 70s my friend and I would scour through the neighborhood to pick up cans. Dragging huge black plastic bags. We’d even pick up some nasty old ones. Then we’d go into his back yard, because it was partially paved, and hammer the cans into flat disks. This is how the recyclers wanted them. And then we transferred them into clear plastic bags, to show that we weren’t putting bricks or something in there.

Our first haul, after a couple of months, was like $1.50.

You know what happens when you hammer an old soda can full of water and cigarette butts? Vomiting. For $1.50. We got over that real quick.

6572

I’d need some sort of cleaning mechanism or be grossed out. If you see fruit flies around those kind of machines… it’s not a small problem.

I do like the idea of reusable things and conveniently placed taps to get whatever it is.

In WA we climbed through construction sites picking up cans, copper wire and something else i can’t remember at the moment. They bought it by pound at some center we walked too. Of course that was just trash left behind by the laborers.

6573

I often wonder what the planet will look like a century from now. Quite the legacy to leave future generations.

The world’s 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things, according to the study. Yet since the dawn of civilisation, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds.

The new work reveals that farmed poultry today makes up 70% of all birds on the planet, with just 30% being wild. The picture is even more stark for mammals – 60% of all mammals on Earth are livestock, mostly cattle and pigs, 36% are human and just 4% are wild animal

6574

Yeah, right now I think carbon footprint is an important consideration, the most important (there are studies, for example, that show that with current usage plastic bags have a lower carbon footprint than other materials).

I mean, I sympathize and support effort for the conservation of the environment. And it’s a big issue. But climate change is a different (although interconnected) issue, and one that is much more pressing.

It’s like when people complaint about the ecological impact of dams and wind farms. I get it, I wish it wasn’t so, but ultimately the carbon reduction outweighs, for now, the secondary damage.

I think a lot of ecologists fail to differentiate or properly prioritize these issues. Like with nuclear power. It’s what drove me to drop my Greenpeace subscription.

6575

I wouldn’t equate some dams with wind farms.

If you have to destroy a pristine stretch of preserved environment with significant biodiversity, which is such a rarity in our deforested world, just to offset global emissions by 0.0000001%, what’s the damn point?

6576

Survival of society and mankind? I dunno…

The environment certainly merits protecting, but it’s secondary to protecting my kids. If the two enter in conflict as they sometimes do I know what I’m choosing.

6577

So building dams that will flood world heritage areas is ‘protecting your kids’, but preventing ecological collapse is not ‘protecting your kids’?

6578

Yep. Reducing carbon footprint takes priority if the damage is not too bad. Sorry, that’s my stance.

6579

Honestly, if you think conserving the environment is merely a ‘big issue’ and that climate change is ‘much more pressing’ then I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about how the planet works and what services the environment provides for human survival.

I have some bad news for you: your kids are absolutely fucked if either of these two nightmare scenarios happen.

The IPCC-equivalent body at the UN released a report last year about this that deserves to be read for anyone interested in protecting their kids:
https://ipbes.net/global-assessment-report-biodiversity-ecosystem-services

6580

No, what I think is that the relative damage of something like a dam to the environment as a whole (and the extent to which it endangers it) is relative and somewhat localized, while contributions to climate change are: 1. global 2. something that in itself endangers the environment globally.